Sun, 10 Mar 2024 05:10:00 +0100 branchcache: explicitly track inheritence "state"
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Sun, 10 Mar 2024 05:10:00 +0100] rev 51493
branchcache: explicitly track inheritence "state" We move from a binary "dirty" flag to a three value "state": "clean", "inherited", "dirty". The "inherited" means that the branch cache is not only "clean", but it is a duplicate of its parent filter. If a branch cache is "inherited", we can non only skip writing its value on disk, but it is a good idea to delete any stale value on disk, as those will just waste time (and possibly induce bug) in the future. We only do this in the update related to transaction or explicit cache update (e.g `hg debugupdatecache`). Deleting the file when we simply detected a stall cache during a read only operation seems more dangerous. We rename `copy` to `inherit_for` to clarify we associate a stronger semantic to the operation.
Sun, 10 Mar 2024 04:53:17 +0100 branchcache: stop writing more branchcache file on disk than needed
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Sun, 10 Mar 2024 04:53:17 +0100] rev 51492
branchcache: stop writing more branchcache file on disk than needed Before this change, we were unconditionally writing a branchmap file for the filter level passed to `update_disk`. This is actually counter productive if no update were needed for this filter level. In many case, the branch cache for a filter level is identical to its parent "subset" and it is better to simply keep the subset update and reuse it every time instead of having to do identical work for similar subset. So we change the `update_disk` method to only write a file when that filter level differ from its parent. This removes many cases where identical files were written, requiring multiple boring update in the test suite. The only notable changes is the change to `test-strip-branch-cache.t`, this case was checking a scenario that no longer reproduce the bug as writing less branchmap file result in less stalled cache on disk. Strictly speaking, we could create a more convoluted scenario that create a similar issue. However the next changeset would also cover that scenario so we directly updated that test case to a "no longer buggy" state.
Fri, 08 Mar 2024 16:49:06 +0100 branchcache: do not copy the `_dirty` flag
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Fri, 08 Mar 2024 16:49:06 +0100] rev 51491
branchcache: do not copy the `_dirty` flag If the inherited branch cache is dirty, it will be written on disk, and the super-set did not need to modify it, the on disk value for the subset will be re-useable as is. So the super set does not needs to write the very same content itself.
Fri, 08 Mar 2024 16:52:08 +0100 branchcache: explicitly assert that copy is always about inheritance
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Fri, 08 Mar 2024 16:52:08 +0100] rev 51490
branchcache: explicitly assert that copy is always about inheritance This would catch cases where copy is used for something else if any existed.
Sat, 09 Mar 2024 02:07:15 +0100 branchcache: stop using `copy(…)` in `replace(…)`
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Sat, 09 Mar 2024 02:07:15 +0100] rev 51489
branchcache: stop using `copy(…)` in `replace(…)` The `copy` method is mostly used for a filter level to inherit the branchmap from a subset. So we stop using (abusing) it in "replace" to ensure `copy` is used only for inheritance purposes. Since `replace` is a method of the BranchMapCache, it seems fine to do lower level operation there.
Fri, 08 Mar 2024 16:47:32 +0100 branchcache: change the _delayed flag to an explicit `_dirty` flag
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Fri, 08 Mar 2024 16:47:32 +0100] rev 51488
branchcache: change the _delayed flag to an explicit `_dirty` flag This is more consistent with the logic we use for other object and it open the way to a clearer management of the cache state. Now, cache are created clean, cache update mark them dirty, writing them on disk mark them clean again.
Fri, 08 Mar 2024 15:50:15 +0100 branchcache: write branchmap in subset inheritance order
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Fri, 08 Mar 2024 15:50:15 +0100] rev 51487
branchcache: write branchmap in subset inheritance order This way, we can guarantee a valid subset has been written before touching the branchmap of another filter. This is especially useful as we are bout to start deleting outdated branchmap file.
Fri, 08 Mar 2024 15:06:54 +0100 branchcache: do not accept "empty update"
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Fri, 08 Mar 2024 15:06:54 +0100] rev 51486
branchcache: do not accept "empty update" This currently does not happens and it will be simpler that is remains that way. If all update do something, we will be able to simply declare, in a later changesets, that all update to result in a dirty branchcache.
Thu, 07 Mar 2024 11:04:34 +0100 branchcache: avoid created a `None` filter repoview when writing
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 07 Mar 2024 11:04:34 +0100] rev 51485
branchcache: avoid created a `None` filter repoview when writing The repoview class is not intended to be used for unfiltered repository.
Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:49:55 +0100 stream-clone-tests: stop filtering non existent warning
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:49:55 +0100] rev 51484
stream-clone-tests: stop filtering non existent warning This filtering was introduced in 74c004a515bc, however there is already no warning in that changeset. So I guess the warnings existed when we the patch was created but the problem was solved in another changeset that 74c004a515bc, rebased on.
(0) -30000 -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -10 +10 +100 +300 tip